My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2018/02/24
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
Agenda Packets - 2018/02/24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:35 PM
Creation date
7/10/2018 12:16:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/24/2018
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/24/2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council January 7, 2008 <br />Special Meeting Page 3 <br /> <br />Planning Commission Meeting and the testimony and materials from this meeting. The 1 <br />testimony at the previous meeting involved driver distraction and that is the information before 2 <br />Council with regard to the specific Ordinance. 3 <br /> 4 <br />Hearing no further comments, Mayor Marty closed the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. 5 <br /> 6 <br />Council Member Flaherty explained that the Ordinance is something for the City to have on 7 <br />dynamic signs. The information provided to the City was a lengthy study commissioned by the 8 <br />City of Minnetonka approved by the League of Minnesota Cities done by SRF Consulting. He 9 <br />then said that he agrees that this comes down to driver distraction. 10 <br /> 11 <br />Council Member Flaherty indicated he would be open to further discussion, but this is necessary 12 <br />to protect the City at this time. 13 <br /> 14 <br />Council Member Mueller said that she used to drive for her employer and she knows the traffic 15 <br />and times have changed, and there are more and more driver distractions. She then said that she 16 <br />had to drive to Monticello to pick up her son recently one evening, and on the way back she was 17 <br />greatly influenced by some very bright digital signs that she had not paid attention to before, and 18 <br />she found them very distracting. She further said that she does not feel that this type of 19 <br />electronic display boards would be appropriate for the community in the locations available for 20 <br />them. 21 <br /> 22 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Flaherty. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Ordinance 801, an 23 <br />Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008 of the City Code Regarding Requirements for Signs and 24 <br />Billboards. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Council Member Stigney indicated that the moratorium is going to expire, and the 27 <br />recommendation of the Attorney was to approve this Ordinance and allow time for other issues 28 <br />with the dynamic sign industry to be worked out. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Mayor Marty said that Clear Channel provided a lot of information to the Council for review. 31 <br />Mayor Marty said that the federal study results are expected to come out in 2009. He then said 32 <br />that if the City were to approve any billboards and the study comes out indicating that they are a 33 <br />distraction then the “cart is before the horse.” He further said that he does see the need to put an 34 <br />Ordinance into effect in order to protect the City. 35 <br /> 36 <br />Mayor Marty indicated that the few digital billboards that he has seen really caught his attention 37 <br />and were distracting. He then said that he would be amenable to discuss, at a later time, a 38 <br />proposal with Clear Channel. 39 <br /> 40 <br />Mayor Marty indicated that he is in support of this Ordinance at this time. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Council Member Stigney indicated that the state needs to come up with some regulations for 43 <br />these signs yet. 44 <br /> 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.